Re: [keyassure] [dane] #14: Bare Public Keys
"dane issue tracker" <trac+dane@trac.tools.ietf.org> Fri, 25 March 2011 06:41 UTC
Return-Path: <trac+dane@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: keyassure@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: keyassure@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8CFD28C0EA for <keyassure@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 23:41:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 033+RWCNP0Yl for <keyassure@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 23:41:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:1890:1112:1::2a]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3602C3A6962 for <keyassure@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 23:41:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.74) (envelope-from <trac+dane@trac.tools.ietf.org>) id 1Q30k6-00077l-Sm; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 23:43:30 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: dane issue tracker <trac+dane@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.11.7
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.11.7, by Edgewall Software
To: henry.story@bblfish.net
X-Trac-Project: dane
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:43:30 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/dane/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dane/trac/ticket/14#comment:2
Message-ID: <064.fc0fed3acc190316c0e42591695670d4@trac.tools.ietf.org>
References: <055.52e849c52f563625a28428b98f4ca55c@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 14
In-Reply-To: <055.52e849c52f563625a28428b98f4ca55c@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: henry.story@bblfish.net, keyassure@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+dane@trac.tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Cc: keyassure@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [keyassure] [dane] #14: Bare Public Keys
X-BeenThere: keyassure@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
List-Id: Key Assurance With DNSSEC <keyassure.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/keyassure>, <mailto:keyassure-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/keyassure>
List-Post: <mailto:keyassure@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:keyassure-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/keyassure>, <mailto:keyassure-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:41:57 -0000
#14: Bare Public Keys
Comment(by henry.story@…):
That ended up being a long thread.
One part of the discussion was on what the keys should look like. A simple
and standard compliant bare public key format would be the one defined by
X509 itself, namely the subset of X509 that defines.
RSAPublicKey ::= SEQUENCE {
modulus INTEGER, -- n
publicExponent INTEGER -- e
}
More on this here:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/keyassure/current/msg01850.html
The thread of February 14th is long, and one summary of the pros and cons
can be found here, with pointers
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/keyassure/current/msg01900.html
--
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
Reporter: mlepinsk@… | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone:
Component: protocol | Version:
Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords:
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dane/trac/ticket/14#comment:2>
dane <http://tools.ietf.org/dane/>
- Re: [keyassure] [dane] #14: Bare Public Keys dane issue tracker
- Re: [keyassure] [dane] #14: Bare Public Keys dane issue tracker